It would be unusual for a contract not to stipulate that a coach should only coach his employers team and not that of a rival club as well. For example, should Leigh sign up Chester, if we're honouring this agreed contract extention, by rights they should buy him out of said 'contact'. Surely it works both ways?

Anyhow we're being fast and loose with limited funding, and the fact we are paying Chester for nothing will impact his successor's chances of making a go of it.

It shows what a decent businessman MC actually is.
Do we want some kind of "car salesman" running the show or, someone who does things properly.
Throughout his time at the helm, MC has always gone about things the right way and this is no different and as I commented earlier, the contract is between Chester and the club and it should be left that way.

I didn't say you did disagree with paying CC - please read carefully before you jump in!
I was disagreeing with you saying 'these are the kind of things that really let MC down' I just don't see why announcing that CC's contract will be honoured lets MC down at all, but we all have our own opinions.

The fact that MC made the announcement public.

Ah, I get what you mean now.
I'm absolutely with you on that.

Thank you pop tart,

When did Andy Last's contract with Hull expire? I think that they 'paid him up' and we employed him (hopefully we got him a bit 'cheaper' as a consequence )

shouldn't be just leigh all clubs within super league shouldn't be allowed to take his employment until his contract has expired else like you say he would need to buy out of the contract

Absolute rubbish do you really believe football managers etc who get the sack don't get a severance pay off?

This is no different get over it loads of people get contracts honoured what usually happens is they get paid up similar to a redundancy payment. He hasn't got a contract anymore he is a free agent he can do what he likes it's a free country not a tin pot regime good luck to him for the future

Not really sure how it works but I think it works on the lines of they get paid weekly/monthly as long as they are out of work, and as soon as they are re employed the wages stop or when the contract ends, it's more noticeable in football where sacked managers (high profile ones anyway) are reluctant to rush into another job because of the high wages they are drawing.

Some take a while to take on a new role but others move into a new post quite quickly.
If they get paid out with a few hundred thousand quid, it certainly takes any desperation out of needing to find a new job.
It's similar is someone gets a hefty redundancy package, they dont need to find a new job as quickly.

It's all down to what is agreed between Carter and Chester.
There is no rule to say he can't get another job.
There is no rule to say he has to be paid monthly.

It's an agreement between them.

If you leave a company by mutual consent you have a termination agreement to state the rules. This is no different. They may have written it down or may not.

I'd also say, coaches wages don't come under the salary cap rules so the payment does not affect that.
And because of that. The payment can come from anywhere, not necessarily out of club funds.

The mistake is mixing the 2 sports up, I would suggest that even the lowest paid premiership manager will be on at least 20k a week which equates to a million pound a year without add ons, all the top managers presumably will be on the best part of 50k to100k a week and with those top jobs being scarce would not be in any rush to find a new job although nobody knows for certain rumours have it that with the sort of money some of these coaches are on some of the premiership clubs can't afford to pay them out in full and are more than happy to pay them weekly, conversely in the real world some of the super league coaches will be on less money than some posters on here especially if your a lorry driver, and it far more difficult to get another head coaches job therefore relying on a decent pay off as against a weekly wage so to speak bearing in mind the terms of the individuals contract, not privvy to any information but I would imagine Chester's pay off will be far easier manageable with a weekly pay day as against a one off payment.

I've not a problem with it just saying in normal working contracts there's normally a clause that prevent them working within a period for a competitor you can hardly think that chessie is going to be a threat against the club in any way